Commute an operator with a constant

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the commutator of a nonlinear operator A, which multiplies a vector by its norm, with a constant b. The initial attempt to calculate the commutator suggests a result of (b^2 - b) times the norm of the vector, raising questions about the correctness of the approach. Participants clarify that the commutator of an operator with a constant is typically zero, but due to the nonlinearity of A, this does not apply. The conversation highlights the importance of recognizing the implications of nonlinearity in operator algebra. Ultimately, the conclusion is that the commutator does not equal zero, emphasizing the unique behavior of nonlinear operators.
widderjoos
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Suppose we had an operator A that multiplied a vector by it's norm:
A \mid \psi \rangle = \langle \psi \mid \psi \rangle \mid \psi \rangle
I wanted to know what it's commutator with a constant would be.


Homework Equations


\left[A,B\right] = AB - BA

The Attempt at a Solution


Suppose b is a real number greater than 1, then
\left[A,b\right] \mid \psi \rangle =(Ab-bA)\mid \psi \rangle
=A (b\mid \psi \rangle ) - b (A \mid \psi \rangle ) = (b^2 - b)\langle \psi \mid \psi \rangle \mid \psi \rangle

I'm think the second equality is wrong since I read that the commutator of an operator with a constant should be 0 and the operator A looks nonlinear. But what should be done instead? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
widderjoos said:

Homework Statement


Suppose we had an operator A that multiplied a vector by it's norm:
A \mid \psi \rangle = \langle \psi \mid \psi \rangle \mid \psi \rangle
I wanted to know what it's commutator with a constant would be.


Homework Equations


\left[A,B\right] = AB - BA

The Attempt at a Solution


Suppose b is a real number greater than 1, then
\left[A,b\right] \mid \psi \rangle =(Ab-bA)\mid \psi \rangle
=A (b\mid \psi \rangle ) - b (A \mid \psi \rangle ) = (b^2 - b)\langle \psi \mid \psi \rangle \mid \psi \rangle

I'm think the second equality is wrong since I read that the commutator of an operator with a constant should be 0 and the operator A looks nonlinear. But what should be done instead? Thanks

Just looking quickly at this, shouldn't you have got

\left( b^2-1 \right) \langle \psi | \psi \rangle \left( b | \psi \rangle \right)?
 
latentcorpse said:
Just looking quickly at this, shouldn't you have got

\left( b^2-1 \right) \langle \psi | \psi \rangle \left( b | \psi \rangle \right)?

oh you're right, but it still doesn't equal 0 though unless I'm missing something again
 
How did you get the b^2 ? It shouldn't be there.
 
widderjoos said:
oh you're right, but it still doesn't equal 0 though unless I'm missing something again

Why should it equal to zero? A is non-linear, so there is no guarantee that A (b|\psi\rangle) = b A |\psi\rangle.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...

Similar threads

Back
Top